Seth Abramson thinks the Bloomberg story on Mueller is BS - here's why

[NewJeffCT]

30 tweet thread from Abramson, but he agrees with me that the 2 US officials cited in the Bloomberg article are anonymous sources within the White House trying to deceive the media yet again.

Link to tweet

(THREAD) There is so much less to this headline than meets the eye—indeed, one could argue the story is interesting *only* in ways the headline doesn't hint at—that it's a shame Bloomberg, a great media outlet, published this in this way. Read on for more.

1/ *Everyone* knows that the next step in the Mueller probe will come after the November 6 election, as Mueller is currently foregoing any additional steps in his work because of the DOJ's recommended "60-day pre-election" rule against action on cases with political implications.

2/ *Everyone* knows that Mueller has completed or nearly completed the Obstruction portion of his investigation (indeed, might have completed it long ago), so even news that Mueller would be ready to issue findings on Obstruction sometime after November 6 would not be surprising.

[Anza404]

1. imo matters little what Mueller reports

Look at it this way i believe Trump did/tried to collaborate with Russia and has tried his hardest to make this go away which i view as obstruction. Let's face it we all know it Mueller's report will be if what they did actually broke the wording of the law for which i do not view much as happening.

My guess is no charges filled, Repubs will not abandon him nor will his base and god help us if Mueller comes back with findings that he did obstruct justice.

[Cary]

2. You don't know any of this

[Anza404]

3. Okay have fun being dissapointed

[Cary]

9. How does that follow from the fact that you don't know?

I don't know either. It's one day at a time, never give up. Fun has nothing to do with it. This is not a game.

VOTE DEMOCRATIC!

[Anza404]

11. I start with imo "in my opinion"

I never said anything is 100% set in stone except when i reference any actual dirty deeds Trump did and if the law would apply to them.

You can disregard all together my opinion if you want. I have not given up but do not subscribe to blind optimism, i feel you are attempting to shut down my voice because you want what i think to not happen. Yes this is not a game but obviously open discourse with you is not possible.

I will block you now.

[Cary]

15. All I said is that you don't know.

That's a fact.

[Separation]

20. Correct

But your fact was addressing what was clearly stated as an opinion. It's like arguing over temperature. if one said, "IMO it's cold in here" and you said, "you dont know what the exact temperature is, and that's a fact".

Sure, you're correct, but what's your point?

[Cary]

22. I stated my point in plain English

If you don't understand how negativity can hurt us then it is beyond my ability to explain it to you.

[former9thward]

13. This is a discussion board.

If posts were limited to what someone "knows" there would be few posts on this site. Why don't you attack the other posters in this thread who have posted there will be charges? Do they "know" this?

[Cary]

14. Where did I say anything about limiting anyone?

Good grief, do I not have a right to express an opinion? In this instance I stated fact.

Where's your beef with that?

[former9thward]

16. You tried to shut down a poster because they didn't "know" something.

But only a poster you disagreed with.

[Cary]

17. Thank you for telling me my intent.

I love when strangers on the internet do that.

Pfeh.

[former9thward]

18. You ignored my question.

Why didn't you challenge posters predicting charges in the thread? Do they "know" that?

[Cary]

19. I did

I have an absolute right to do that too. You don't have to like it. You have my permission.

[former9thward]

23. Thanks for your permission but I am not into trying to stop discussion on a discussion board.

[Cary]

24. Funny, I don't recall doing any of the things you accuse me of.

If I didn't know better I would say I was being trolled, but you would never do that.

Surely you can cite direct quotes where I actually did these things you accuse me of. You can do that, right? Because you are not a troll, right?

Show me.

[former9thward]

25. Post 22

"If you don't understand how negativity can hurt us then it is beyond my ability to explain it to you." That was in response to a poster commenting that they thought there would be no charges. So you are attempting to stop those opinions by calling them negative and they are going to hurt us.

Those attacks (along with personal attacks on me) may work with newer members but not the rest of us.

[Cary]

26. Oh no! Oh no!

I said negstivity would hurt us? The horror!

No wonder you think I am "shutting down converaation."

Oh, wait..... actually I am entitled to my opinion. I mean, actually I am making conversation.

You must think I'm really stupid. smh

[alittlelark]

4. 7 posts ! Welcome to DU !!

[lame54]

6. Then Mueller is letting those he indicted off easy...

If their info that they traded for leniency adds up to nothing

He has Trump's personal lawyer and his lifetime accountant

He HAS to have something on Trump

[Anza404]

8. I am not saying he does or does not have something on Trump... I do not know what

he has i just do not think anything will come of it. Imho i feel the best and only way to get him out is vote his ass out in 2020.

[NewJeffCT]

10. Mueller is going to recommend multiple charges

for Obstruction of Justice, Witness Tampering, Perjury (if his written answers conflict with sworn testimony from all the Flippers) and more.

And, that's just the Obstruction phase.

Rosenstein will present the findings to Congress and it will be up to the House to decide on starting impeachment proceedings or not - remember, the House only needs a majority to impeach. The Senate would need 2/3 to convict, however. Hearings broadcast live on TV where people like Don Jr, Jared Kushner, Michael Cohen and others testify live on TV and under oath can lead to additional charges before an impeachment vote as well.

Or, the House can decide to wait for Mueller to complete his investigation and leave it hanging over Trump's head for the next 18 months to 2 years in the run up to the 2020 elections.

[Anza404]

12. If he does recommend charges

I do agree that would be a nice cloud hanging over his head for any Dem candidate if he continues his 2020 campaign after that.

Id settle for him being out of office and someone sane in office but oh man would i love to see his butt behind bars.

[triron]

5. Now CNN is reporting more BS about Rosenstein wanting the probe to end soon.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/17/politics/rod-rosenstein-special-counsel-donald-trump/index.html

[NewJeffCT]

7. based on the Bloomberg report again

it's spreading like wildfire

[Separation]

21. I dont think it's close to being over

Mueller just sent over his written questions for Trumps lawyer to answer. Once they send that back it has to be verified, and like another poster above stated, those questions will be verified through the people that have flipped. That right there could lead to more people being charged, i.e. his kids, Jared, etc.

Of course I dont know any of this as fact, just in case anyone feels like they need to point that out.

[Grasswire2]

27. I tried to stamp it out in various places yesterday after reading Seth.

And I am surprised that Bloomberg took the bait. And disappointed, frankly.